and thank you for linking to the Pew data - very interesting. I always wonder why these are pegged to "white" families when "asian" families are better off economically. I'm against trying to get anything insightful from lumping people by appearance, but just a question within that framework. eg: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2…
It got a bit truncated - but no worries. Was just my musing about how data is collected/presented as I'm writing (laboriously) something myself and I've noticed the same oddities.
There is nothing honest about this exercise, nor is there anything insightful about propping up stereotypes. You're right to note that people do this all the time - it is one of a thousand mindless heuristics we use to get through the world. But that doesn't mean it's helpful or "honest". Nor is it very interesting or accurate as you are conflating culture and appearance and socioeconomics and a half-dozen other variables. It's a coarse, zeroth order thinking that you can try to elevate but ultimately doesn't advance any beneficial societal outcomes. "asian culture" - there are some 4 billion asians in the world - Burmese, Cambodian, Hmong etc. all have very different study habits than Chinese, Japanese, Korean etc. (and of course everything I said there based on countries is a coarse-grained assumption - students from Seoul very different than those from eg Busan). "black culture" - tell me about it - lmao...would love to hear what you think that is. sex-based ones are at least more rooted in reality as some of this is related to hormone production etc. post-puberty. But if you're actually interested in solving problems, you'll find that you need to think a bit harder about problems than "Indians are like this, blacks are like this". Boring, inaccurate, and misleading at best.
It's hard to find any connection between what I wrote and your response. This response is the God Emperor of the Straw Men. You are characterizing my position as the exact opposite of what I wrote.
I've deleted it rather than go back and forth with turbo-charged tedium. I am not on here to be trolled, for arguments, or for teenybopper goading like "lmao." Bye.
Not sure what you're on about to be honest. I've gotten a few messages from you since we exchanged. You're making assertions that aren't true - I'm pushing back against that. The rest of the ad hominem etc. doesn't lend you any credibility. If there is something you'd like to discuss - happy to get into details. I've seen you reply on several folks' statements in there and you seem to feel you're being misunderstood a lot. Perhaps that's something to examine in terms of communication style or content. Have a great weekend.
and thank you for linking to the Pew data - very interesting. I always wonder why these are pegged to "white" families when "asian" families are better off economically. I'm against trying to get anything insightful from lumping people by appearance, but just a question within that framework. eg: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/11/01/how-wealth-inequality-has-changed-in-the-u-s-since-the-great-recession-by-race-ethnicity-and-income/?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
Did your reply get cut off? I'm not sure if you meant to ask a question here.
It got a bit truncated - but no worries. Was just my musing about how data is collected/presented as I'm writing (laboriously) something myself and I've noticed the same oddities.
There is nothing honest about this exercise, nor is there anything insightful about propping up stereotypes. You're right to note that people do this all the time - it is one of a thousand mindless heuristics we use to get through the world. But that doesn't mean it's helpful or "honest". Nor is it very interesting or accurate as you are conflating culture and appearance and socioeconomics and a half-dozen other variables. It's a coarse, zeroth order thinking that you can try to elevate but ultimately doesn't advance any beneficial societal outcomes. "asian culture" - there are some 4 billion asians in the world - Burmese, Cambodian, Hmong etc. all have very different study habits than Chinese, Japanese, Korean etc. (and of course everything I said there based on countries is a coarse-grained assumption - students from Seoul very different than those from eg Busan). "black culture" - tell me about it - lmao...would love to hear what you think that is. sex-based ones are at least more rooted in reality as some of this is related to hormone production etc. post-puberty. But if you're actually interested in solving problems, you'll find that you need to think a bit harder about problems than "Indians are like this, blacks are like this". Boring, inaccurate, and misleading at best.
It's hard to find any connection between what I wrote and your response. This response is the God Emperor of the Straw Men. You are characterizing my position as the exact opposite of what I wrote.
I've deleted it rather than go back and forth with turbo-charged tedium. I am not on here to be trolled, for arguments, or for teenybopper goading like "lmao." Bye.
Three.
Not sure what you're on about to be honest. I've gotten a few messages from you since we exchanged. You're making assertions that aren't true - I'm pushing back against that. The rest of the ad hominem etc. doesn't lend you any credibility. If there is something you'd like to discuss - happy to get into details. I've seen you reply on several folks' statements in there and you seem to feel you're being misunderstood a lot. Perhaps that's something to examine in terms of communication style or content. Have a great weekend.